The Financial Ombudsman Service Charges: A Disaster for Vulnerable Consumers The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has long been a vital avenue for consumers seeking justice against financial wrongdoing. However, the recent decision to impose charges on professional representatives who bring cases on behalf of consumers threatens to undermine access to fair redress—particularly for the most […]
The Resignation of Abby Thomas: Has Rachel Reeves Pressured the Financial Ombudsman Service? The recent resignation of Abby Thomas, the Chief Executive and Chief Ombudsman of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), raises serious concerns about political influence and the integrity of consumer redress in the UK. A Crucial Moment in Time for the FOS At […]
The Motor Finance Industry’s Claims of Damage Debunked: Commission Disclosure Doesn’t Deter Consumers In recent months, the motor finance industry has claimed that the fallout from the commission scandal—particularly the court rulings on the non-disclosure of commissions—would harm the sector, increase the cost of motor finance, and reduce consumer confidence. This resulted in the Rachel […]
Rachel Reeves Must Resign: A Call to End Corruption in Government and Finance The recent actions of Chancellor Rachel Reeves, seeking to intervene in legal proceedings to block justice for millions of motor finance consumers, represent a shocking display of government corruption and undue influence by the financial industry. Her attempts to protect motor finance […]
Rachel Reeves’ Controversial Intervention: Corruption at the Heart of Government? In an extraordinary and deeply troubling development, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves has reportedly attempted to intervene in the upcoming Supreme Court hearing concerning motor finance providers. This move has raised serious concerns about corruption at the highest levels of government and calls into […]
How Some Motor Finance Providers Are Attempting to Time-Bar Commission Claims, Contrary to a Supreme Court Ruling Background: Canada Square v Potter In the Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter [2023] case, the Supreme Court ruled that the limitation period for bringing a claim can be extended under Section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980 […]